I believe that one of the questions that the vast majority of leaders ask themselves is, "Am I good at leading my team?" Regardless of the level of your leadership or the area in which you apply it. This is true for an Executive Director. A project manager. ONE Scrum Master. The leader of a team of volunteers. The captain of a sports team. I imagine they all try to evaluate themselves in the performance of their leadership role.

A good leader also knows that the success of his team can measure the quality of his leadership. Although success comes from the collective efforts of all team members (and the leader is one of those members), poor leadership can sabotage team members' efforts.

And when we try to evaluate a leader's effectiveness through his team, I think we can do so from three perspectives: from the perspective of the customer for whom that team seeks to create value; from the perspective of the organization in which the team works; and from within the team itself.

From the customer's perspective, a leader and his or her team can evaluate the effectiveness of leadership and work very objectively.

If we're talking about the corporate world, measuring customer satisfaction by value received is neither complex nor subjective. There are numerous product and business metrics that allow us to undoubtedly evaluate the success of a job with numbers. Even customer engagement, through a simple NPS, brings an objective evaluation and some precision.

For example, if we talk about a football club, the team's success towards its customer (its fans) can be measured by the titles won, which certainly leave its customers quite satisfied. In the vast majority of cases, this reflects a good job done by those in charge (president, coach, captain, etc.).

From the perspective of the organization in which the team is incorporated, it is also possible to evaluate the work of a leader and his team through indicators. The vast majority of companies have strategic indicators that make it possible to assess, with clarity and a certain precision, whether their teams are successfully achieving their objectives.

A simple example: If your company manages OKRs[1] and your team projects support one or more goals or key outcomes, there are objective metrics that demonstrate your team's success or failure and most likely your leadership.

The career progression of team members within the organization can also be a good thermometer.

But if we look at the team's perspective, I think that assessing the effectiveness of leadership is not as easy to attest to. In particular, I think that in this perspective, a good leader is the one who manages to create an environment where people who work with satisfaction have individual growth that is a consequence of the evolution of this group as a team.

But how can you measure that evolution? How do I know if my team is growing as a unit? How can I measure the satisfaction of each individual? In my opinion, it is not so objective to evaluate with numbers and indicators.

 

The 5 team challenges

Patrick Lencioni[2] in his book "The Five Disfunctions of a Team"[3] describes 5 aspects (which he calls "dysfunctions", but I think this name is a bit heavy handed) that pose challenges to a team: Lack of Trust, Fear Conflict, Lack of Commitment, Avoid Accountability, and Lack of Attention to Results.

 

I view these dysfunctions as pitfalls that leaders need to avoid letting their teams fall into. From the team's internal perspective, successful leadership is related to the leader who manages to foster and create an environment where his team does not suffer (or suffers as little as possible) from these aspects, where the team can grow collectively and individually in overcoming these challenges.

Let's go to them.

 

Lack of trust

Trust is the foundation of any successful relationship. This is where it occurs when team members are unable to understand and open up to each other. It comes from a lack of willingness or even courage to be vulnerable with colleagues. Admitting mistakes and weaknesses is not trivial and without this, building a foundation of trust is not possible.

When we talk about a team, trust is related to the fact that members believe that their colleagues have good intentions and therefore, there is no need for defensiveness. Consequently, they can feel free to show vulnerability and expose themselves without reservation.

Great team members trust each other. And this is true for any type of team.

Credits: Dio Hasbi Saniskoro from Pexels

 

The leader's role in this challenge is to create an environment where that trust can be built, and one of the important steps to that is being the first to show vulnerability. Although it may seem that there is a risk of losing prestige in the team, this attitude is nothing more than an example of how members should behave. Moreover, it becomes a clear demonstration that vulnerability.

Although it may appear that there is a threat of loss of prestige in the team, this attitude is nothing more than an example of how members should behave. Moreover, it clearly demonstrates that vulnerability does not mean punishment.

Of course, this demonstration of vulnerability on the leader's part must be genuine, authentic, and true. Never staged!

 

Fear of conflict

Lack of trust usually leads to the second challenge, fear of conflict. Building trust leads to members feeling confident that they can have good debates, even if they are heated, without being punished.

Any lasting relationship needs productive conflict to develop. Be it at work, on the football team, in the community, in the condo, and even at home.

However, conflict is often seen as taboo or negative and eventually avoided or curtailed. Obviously, we are talking about ideological conflicts, points of view, and not destructive or political struggles. It is a debate that focuses on ideas, not personal attacks. It is a debate to find the best possible solution.

Credits: Frank Busch on Unsplash

 

When members of a low-trust team avoid ideological conflict to avoid hurting members' feelings, they end up having the opposite effect: the good debate is avoided, and personal attacks are generated. Worst of all, they end up repeating the same issue several times.

Healthy conflict saves time, and the leader needs to be aware of this. Promoting healthy conflict is a challenge for any leader, made more difficult by the natural desire to protect members from personal insults and attacks. And also the feeling of wasting time or the fear of resolution.

However, this fear should not cause the leader to shut down conflict hastily. This prevents the team from developing their own conflict skills. You must not think you are failing or "losing control" as your team develops ideological conflict, even if it is heated.

It's a big challenge, but the leader needs to be moderate and let the outcome emerge naturally. And of course, it must also guide behaviour and avoid censoring necessary and productive discussions.

 

Lack of commitment

Productive conflict takes into account the views of all components so that the group can make a commitment and accept decisions because it has benefited from everyone's ideas.

Commitment comes from clarity and compliance. If the decision is clear and transparent and made after listening to the views of others (the outcome of productive conflict), it will be supported and agreed to by all, even those who voted against it.

The desire for consensus and the need for certainty often lead to a lack of commitment. Unanimity is almost never possible, but consideration of everyone's opinion always is. And that creates a willingness for everyone to commit to the final decision.

When the action plan is clear, uncertainty about the decision is no longer a driving factor. Commitment leads to courage to make the decision, knowing that there will be no punishment if it is not the best course.

Once again, effective leadership stems from the fact that the leader must be a benchmark for his team. He must be the team member who is most comfortable with the prospect of making a decision that may turn out to be wrong down the road. He must speak and act to show that if collective decision-making leads to a path that is inappropriate for the moment, it is not tantamount to failure.

Credits: Annie Spratt on Unsplash

The team should be encouraged to speak up on what was discussed and to stick to what the team decided. And even to participate in finding a new way if the original way proves inadequate.

 

Avoid blame

As noted when we discussed this topic in an informal chat, it is important to clarify that "holding others accountable" does not mean pointing fingers and looking for someone to blame. In the context of a team, accountability refers to how much members are willing to draw the attention of colleagues to various issues.

Credits: Gerd Altmann on Pixabay

This challenge is rooted in an unwillingness or lack of courage to confront the interpersonal discomfort that accompanies the act. Or even the tendency to avoid difficult conversations. Obviously, it's much easier to talk about it than to do it. But if you have trust, a willingness for good conflict and engagement, the risk is calculated.

And it's interesting that very close members tend to be reluctant to indict themselves or draw attention for fear of damaging a personal bond that is valued. Unfortunately, this ironically worsens the relationship. Resentment builds because expectations are not met, and the standards of the group are compromised. Paying attention, with arguments and through a discussion of ideas, shows respect. It shows that there are good expectations for the colleague's performance.

A leader who seeks a favourable environment for the collective growth of his or her team knows that, although it may seem politically incorrect, one of the most effective means of maintaining high standards of performance is "pressure" among colleagues. The term was placed in quotation marks because this pressure is not an unnecessary burden or the pursuit of perfection. Rather, it is an encouragement that an environment focused on transparency and feedback, supported by a mentality of continuous and incremental improvement, is always possible and healthy. Before all policies and systems, no one wants to disappoint valued colleagues.

And this is a big challenge for both the leader and the team. It is not trivial to stimulate the team and allow employees to pay attention to each other. In many environments, it may seem that the leader has no competence to encourage and spur on his team, or that he shirks this responsibility and delegates this role.

Of course, if the leader fosters this culture, he must be willing to arbitrate when the team cannot find a solution. But it is important to make it clear that the act of accountability should not be left to consensus, but that the group owns that responsibility, knowing that the leader will intervene whenever necessary.

 

Lack of attention to results

When team members avoid confronting difficult situations with each other, it is an invitation for each to turn his or her attention to ways that do not lead to a common outcome. Any team that self-evaluates its own performance needs to focus on specific goals and clearly defined outcomes.

It is necessary to pay attention to the danger of team status and individual status. The former stems from the fact that for some members, the simple fact of being part of the team is enough to keep them satisfied. Although they want the team to achieve certain results, this is not worth much sacrifice. Teams that are victims of team status do not strive to evolve or achieve greater goals. They just want to continue to exist and operate on a sort of autopilot.

Credits: Fauxels on Pexels

 

The second case, on the other hand, refers to the tendency of members to focus their efforts only on developing their own positions or careers, using the team as a means. Unfortunately, in such teams, there is no trust, conflict, commitment, or accountability to compensate for the lack of desire to win and thrive together.

I understand that this is the challenge where the leader needs to set the pace more. If the team senses that the leader values something other than the outcome and meeting the collective goals, they will adopt that attitude. Altruism, objectivity, transparency and genuine recognition are fundamental. It is necessary to make it clear by example that there is room for status and individual development. But this must be a natural consequence of results and collective work. It must never be obtained at the expense of the team.

 

Summary

Human relationships are extremely complex. Yet, ironically, teams are successful because they are essentially human. By acknowledging your own imperfections, you can overcome natural tendencies that make trust, conflict, commitment, accountability, and results orientation taboo. And it is the duty of the true leader to guide the team along this path, especially by example.

In practicing leadership, I try to understand that it is not about mastering a subtle and sophisticated theory or simply understanding a list of principles. It's about accepting that in the relationship between any group of people, the math is not perfect. You can bring together the best professionals on your team, but their expertise and individual talent is no guarantee of a successful team.

I try to understand and share with my teams that in this complex environment that is the human relationship, the whole is not the sum of the parts. It is a result of the interaction between the parties. I believe that the success and development of a team comes from the awareness that the leader must first and foremost lead and walk with his team so that the 5 challenges mentioned are overcome on a daily basis.

 

AN INQUIRY LEADER IN FRONT OF THIS ASPECTS ELEVATES THE CHANGE OF SUCCESS OF ITS LEADERSHIP AND TEAM. A CONFORMIST LEADER CAN STOP EXTRACTING THE BEST OF HIS TEAM AND STOP USING THE POTENTIAL AND INDIVIDUAL COMPETENCE OF HIS MEMBERS.

 

In a conversation with Jefferson Almeida about leadership, we agreed that leadership is not just a status or related to professional success. Awareness that leadership, especially in times of digital transformation, needs to be shared, with the leader focusing on clarifying the main goal and helping the team deal with the constraints, is a fundamental pillar to getting closer to success. And this includes creating an environment where there is a culture of open and transparent feedback, by all for all, supported by processes of continuous improvement and learning.

Healthy leadership does not start with a leader who only cares about individuals. Rather, it emanates from the one who creates an environment and encourages individuals to take care of themselves and foster collective growth. The individual comes next as a consequence.

There are several ways to do this (which we can discuss in other articles). I hope you find yours.

Note and Disclaimer: The author of this Blog post is Ivan Moreira, PMP®. He is the guest author of PMI.hu. The writing reflects the author's own professional opinion, findings, and conclusions, which do not necessarily agree with the position of PMI Budapest, Hungarian Chapter, and cannot be considered as an official recommendation, resolution, or opinion of PMI Budapest. The copyright and publication rights of the writing belong to the original author.

 

About the author:

Ivan Moreira, PMP®[4] works in the technology industry. He is agility enthusiast, international speaker, volunteer, passionate about helping companies and people address change in their businesses and lives with technology, a believer that community progress together can change the world.

 

 

 

References:

> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OKR

> [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrick_Lencioni

> [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Five_Dysfunctions_of_a_Team

> [4] https://www.ivanmoreira.org/about